A step in the right direction, for sure. It's sorta rare to see one element of the government curb the theft of another element of government.

Quote

"For good reason, the protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history: Exorbitant tolls undermine other constitutional liberties," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in the court's opinion. "Excessive fines can be used, for example, to retaliate against or chill the speech of political enemies. ... Even absent a political motive, fines may be employed in a measure out of accord with the penal goals of retribution and deterrence."

However, it is noted by your humble servant that authoritarian attitudes never actually advocate removal of the government's "authority" to steal from citizens -- they're just tempering that bad habit to some extent, and I'm guessing that it's to keep the sheeple from rising up in significant numbers. Who knows, eh?Still, that little gain "given" to us by the SCOTUS is better than nothing. Salute!Elias

The justices ruled unanimously that the Constitution’s restriction on excessive fines and seizures applies to state and local governments.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled unanimously to limit the ability of state and local governments to seize property, including through the controversial practice of civil asset forfeiture. Voting 9-0, the justices found that the Constitution's prohibition on excessive fines under the Eighth Amendment applies not only to the federal government but also to state and local authorities, and that practices such as civil asset forfeiture – where law enforcement can seize the property of anyone accused of criminal activity, regardless whether they're convicted or even charged – run afoul of the restriction.

1.Teaching Math In the 1960sA logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost ofproduction is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit?2.Teaching Math In the 1970sA logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost ofproduction is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit?3.Teaching Math In the 1980sA logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost ofproduction is $80. Did he make a profit? Yes or No4.Teaching Math In the 1990sA logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20.Your assignment: Underline the number 20.5.Teaching Math In 2018(a) A logger cuts down a beautiful forest because he is selfish andinconsiderate and cares nothing for the habitat of animals or thepreservation of our woodlands. He does this so he can make a profitof just $20.What do you think of this way of making a living?(b) Topic for class participation after answering question (a):How did the birds and squirrels feel as the logger cut down their homes?Please note: There are no wrong answers - feel free to express yourfeelings e.g. anger, anxiety, inadequacy, helplessness etc.(Should you require debriefing at the conclusion of the exam, there arecounselors available to assist you to adjust back into the real world.)6.Teaching Math In 2050تكلفةالإنتاج هو80 دولاراً. كيف الكثيرمن المالولم؟دولار.نهابمنكارلوادتبيعاتشيرو

Wow, this just in, just found it (but my dog ate the link to the article)

From the "Daily Blab" by intrepid reporter Ignatius A Bsartist the 3rd (who goes by the handles of "ICdeadpeople" or "ICbseverywhere)

"While disguised as a raccoon randomly climbing up the side of the supreme court building, looking in windows, I happened to see Ruth Bader Ginsburg scrutinising supreme court documents with her two new clerks Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson. And there were absolutely no embalmers in sight".

I guess that's it. Total proof of life. We just have to concede that the supreme court will be in democrat hands for the next 40 years or so.

Lately the internet has been "lousy" with stories and videos about RBG being dead, incapacitated, unable to carry out her "duties" etc. And I have resisted all that so far, not even reading about it, but I got really cynical when I saw this article. You'd think if it was true there'd be a huge fanfare by the media with hundreds of pictures of a smiling RBG sitting at her desk "chomping at the bit" to get back to work of the supreme court and make sure that Roe V Wade is absolutely cast in stone and can never be challenged or her entering the building at least. Is there no limit to what these weirdos expect people to believe?

Momammad Atta's amazing fireproof, indestructible passport survived one of the most deadly fires in history and randomly came floating down from the sky to the arms of a policeman.

Navy seals killed Osama Bin Laden in 2011 and buried the body at sea, having taken no pictures and no dna samples from the corpse and then coincidentally all died themselves in a helicopter accident a few years later.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg is alive and doing well and has been "working from home".